Lawmakers and government officials on Monday discussed draft amendments to help secure Taiwan’s critical technologies from theft by China and other foreign powers. Although details of the proposals were not disclosed, they likely incorporate ideas brought up in October last year at a Taiwan-Japan-US workshop on intellectual property rights.
In a statement released on the opening day of the conference, American Institute in Taiwan Director Brent Christensen said that the protection of intellectual property rights “is the key ingredient to attract investment and encourage innovation.” Although neither Christensen nor Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Tien Chung-kwang (田中光) made specific mention of China, it is likely that Chinese theft of trade secrets was a topic at the gathering, or at least one of the motivations for holding it.
A Bloomberg report published on Jan. 27 addressed how the world’s reliance on Taiwanese semiconductor technology is a growing concern for policymakers. Therefore, it is reasonable that the US would be concerned about Chinese theft of Taiwanese technology and would want to cooperate with Taiwan to prevent it. There has also been a surge in prosecution of cases involving theft of trade secrets in the US.
Prosecuting intellectual property theft was difficult in the US, as state prosecutors were hampered when pursuing interstate or cross-border cases. Companies could pursue charges under the US Economic Espionage Act when theft involved a foreign power such as China or Russia, but the FBI often lacked the resources to pursue such lengthy investigations. For that reason, cases often failed to make it to trial, or prosecutors would simply pursue lesser charges.
Former US president Barack Obama addressed the issue with the Defend Trade Secrets Act, which went into effect in 2016. It allows companies to take trade-theft cases to federal court in the US.
Taiwan faces a similar issue. For example, a businessman found guilty in 2019 of stealing trade secrets related to the production of smart glass from two Taiwanese companies and selling them to a Chinese firm was sentenced to only 18 months in prison and fined NT$2 million (US$70,267). He had set up a local company through which he handled business dealings with the Chinese firm, and had traveled on several occasions with an engineer to Chengdu to teach Chinese engineers how to produce the glass.
Officials on Monday said that such cases are difficult to prosecute under current laws, because investigators are often unable to prove the involvement of foreign powers, or investigate matters outside of Taiwan.
This is concerning not only because of the economic implications, but also because technology sold to China that has military applications would almost certainly end up in the hands of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.
It is at least partly for this reason that officials are seeking to make a distinction between critical and noncritical technologies. Under the proposed amendments, situations involving critical technologies would be tried as national security cases, without the need for prosecutors to prove involvement by a foreign power. This would help protect national security, as well as the interests of Taiwanese firms.
However, just as with laws against misinformation, careful execution of the law is crucial to protect individuals from malicious litigation.
Hopefully, legislators will glean what they can from the experience of US officials. Cooperation with the US and other countries on the issue — such as sharing investigative information and extraditing suspects — would also prevent Taiwanese abroad from stealing trade secrets for China.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
After declaring Iran’s military “gone,” US President Donald Trump appealed to the UK, France, Japan and South Korea — as well as China, Iran’s strategic partner — to send minesweepers and naval forces to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. When allies balked, the request turned into a warning: NATO would face “a very bad” future if it refused. The prevailing wisdom is that Trump faces a credibility problem: having spent years insulting allies, he finds they would not rally when he needs them. That is true, but superficial, as though a structural collapse could be caused by wounded feelings. Something
Former Taipei mayor and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) founding chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) was sentenced to 17 years in prison on Thursday, making headlines across major media. However, another case linked to the TPP — the indictment of Chinese immigrant Xu Chunying (徐春鶯) for alleged violations of the Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法) on Tuesday — has also stirred up heated discussions. Born in Shanghai, Xu became a resident of Taiwan through marriage in 1993. Currently the director of the Taiwan New Immigrant Development Association, she was elected to serve as legislator-at-large for the TPP in 2023, but was later charged with involvement
Out of 64 participating universities in this year’s Stars Program — through which schools directly recommend their top students to universities for admission — only 19 filled their admissions quotas. There were 922 vacancies, down more than 200 from last year; top universities had 37 unfilled places, 40 fewer than last year. The original purpose of the Stars Program was to expand admissions to a wider range of students. However, certain departments at elite universities that failed to meet their admissions quotas are not improving. Vacancies at top universities are linked to students’ program preferences on their applications, but inappropriate admission
RSS